Agricultural Trade, Development Problems and Poverty in the Least Developed Countries

2007 ◽  
pp. 13-24
Author(s):  
Olle Östensson
Keyword(s):  
Developed Countries ◽  
Agricultural Trade ◽  
Least Developed Countries

scholarly journals Determinants of the Korean agricultural trade with the LDCs and the OECD countries

2014 ◽  
Vol 60 (No. 3) ◽  
pp. 110-122
Author(s):  
S.Y. Lee ◽  
S.S. Lim
Keyword(s):  
Trade Policy ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Oecd Countries ◽  
Agricultural Trade ◽  
Policy Reforms ◽  
Least Developed Countries ◽  
Tariff Rates ◽  
Stage Analysis ◽  
Import Trade ◽  
Domestic Products

The study aims to analyze Korea’s import trade in agricultural products with (i) the least developed countries (LDCs) and (ii) the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. Extended versions of a gravity model are adopted and the balanced panel data for the unilateral trade over the period of 2003 to 2008 are constructed using the Harmonized System Codes. The Heckman two-stage analysis is incorporated to detect the potential selection bias arising from many zero trades. We find that only preferential tariffs on the LDCs have significantly contributed to the trade flows. However, in contrast, gross domestic products (GDPs), free trade agreements (FTAs), the applied tariff rates, and the exchange rates turn out to be statistically significant in the trade with the OECD countries, thus highlighting the possibility of the potential trade benefits associated with the trade policy reforms. The study is unique in that it empirically estimates the determinants of agricultural trade between the LDCs and developed countries and reveals the potential effectiveness of the preferential treatment and the implementation of the trade policy reforms.    

scholarly journals The consequences of agricultural trade liberalization for developing countries: distinguishing between genuine benefits and false hopes

2006 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 225-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
JEAN-CHRISTOPHE BUREAU ◽  
SÉBASTIEN JEAN ◽  
ALAN MATTHEWS
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Trade Liberalization ◽  
Agricultural Sector ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Agricultural Trade ◽  
Free Access ◽  
Least Developed Countries ◽  
Sub Saharan ◽  
Agricultural Trade Liberalization ◽  
The Impact

Recent analyses suggest that the impact of agricultural trade liberalization on developing countries will be very uneven. The Doha Round focuses on tariff issues, but some developing countries currently have practically duty-free access to European and North American markets under preferential regimes. Multilateral liberalization will erode the benefits of these preferences, which are presently rather well utilized in the agricultural sector. While South American and East Asian countries should benefit from an agricultural agreement, African and Caribbean countries are unlikely to do so. The main obstacles to the exports of the sub-Saharan African and Least Developed Countries appear to be in the non-tariff area (sanitary, phytosanitary standards), which increasingly originate from the private sector and are not dealt with under the Doha framework (traceability requirements, etc.). An agreement in Doha is unlikely to solve these problems and open large markets for the poorest countries. While this is not an argument to give up multilateral liberalization, a more specific and differentiated treatment should be considered in WTO rules, and corrective measures should be implemented.

scholarly journals A Política de Comércio Internacional Agrícola de Brasil e Estados Unidos no Contencioso do Algodão na OMC (2002-2005)

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-65
Author(s):  
Marcelo Fernandes de Oliveira ◽  
Camilla Silva Geraldello
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Trade ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
The United States ◽  
Agricultural Trade ◽  
Least Developed Countries ◽  
Modus Operandi ◽  
Institutional Management ◽  
The Developed Countries

O objetivo deste artigo é compreender o modus operandi dos instrumentos e mecanismos institucionais no Brasil e nos Estados Unidos de formulação da política de comércio internacional agrícola centrada em três variáveis: a) mobilização de interesses, b) funcionamento de instituições e c) divulgação de informações. Como exemplo, utilizaremos o contencioso do algodão na Organização Mundial do Comércio contra os Estados Unidos, desencadeado por uma coalizão de países em desenvolvimento e Países de Menor Desenvolvimento Relativo sob liderança do Brasil entre 2002 e 2005. Palavras-chave: Brasil e Estados Unidos; Política de Comércio Internacional; OMC; Agricultura; Contencioso do algodão.     Abstract: This article´s objective is undertand of the modus operandi of the institutional mecanisms and instruments in Brazil and the United States in the formulation of international agricultural trade policy, focused on three variables: a) interest´s mobilization b) institutional management and c) information press. As an example, will be used the cotton dispute on the WTO against the United States, which took place by a strike of the developed countries and the least developed countries under Brazil´s lidership between 2002 and 2005. Key words: Brazil and United States; International Trade Policy; WTO; Agriculture; Cotton Dispute.     Recebido em: dezembro/2017 Aprovado em: maio/2018.

Commentary: Developing Countries Perspective on Agricultural Liberalization

2005 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 1850053
Author(s):  
Love Mtesa
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Addis Ababa ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Agricultural Trade ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Least Developed Countries ◽  
Foreign Service ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Agricultural Trade Liberalization

A commentary on Patrick Messerlin's article, "Agricultural Trade Liberalization." Love Mtesa is Zambian Ambassador to the United Nations and other international organizations in Geneva, including the WTO. He is the Coordinator for the Least Developed Countries at the Ambassadorial level. Ambassador Mtesa joined the Zambian Foreign Service in 1966 and later served [in]: Kinshasa, Congo; Addis Ababa, Ethiopa; as Director of the African and Middle East Department in the Zambian Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Harare, Zimbabwe; as Zambia’s Permanent Representative at the United Nations in New York; and as Zambian Ambassador to Great Britain and other European nations. He has also been active in opposition politics in Zambia for a number of years.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document